- Top Features:
- War Room
- Glenn Greenwald
- Broadsheet
- Joan Walsh
- Camille Paglia
- Since You Asked
- Follow Salon:
Read other letters about this article
While using such words isn't really my thing, I don't want to ban anyone from using words as they choose. People who love words and language almost never want to do that sort of thing. For instance there are many books banned or restricted from being taught in our schools out of political correctness or prudishness or for religious reasons. I always oppose this sort of thing.
Much can be learned from Huckleberry Finn for instance. I have also never been the sort of feminist who thought there was no value in the writing of dead white males.
Neither would I ban the t-shirts which insult Hillary. My God, if the woman could be killed by a few insults, she would've died in Arkansas. Instead, she just keeps going and going and going.
However, there are trolls here at Broadsheet who think despising their sentiments is the same thing as censorship or that ignoring them is the same thing as abuse. One of them always cries loudly about the political correctness of feminists. What he would really like to do is censor Broadsheet. However, I see that they keep letting him crawl out from under his rock. So be it. However, as a private enterprise, Broadsheet would have every right to ban him if they chose. They generously let him proceed, still confused though he is about free speech and what actually constitutes free speech rights.
It is the government which has no right to abridge free speech. However, it is naive to assume that some rights will never rub up against other rights and cause conflicts and difficult decisions need not be made. The fascinating thing about our constitutional process is that it must be necessarily dynamic as new conflicts and new challenges arise.
Have you read Lady Chatterley's Lover by D.H. Lawrence? If you haven't, you should.
